Geostationary Satellite

[MarkS]

I accidentally caught this while doing some focus tests on the yellow banana scope.  The camera (Canon 350D with wonky CCD) was set to take 30sec exposures with 30sec pauses during which I adjusted the focus.  This is a stack of 7.

A geostationary stays fixed in the same position in the sky.  The background star field will "move past" the geostationary at 360deg/day i.e. 15arcsec/sec.  Each of the "dashes" in the image below are 450arcsec (i.e. 30sec * 15).  That speed and the direction of travel relative to the star field are dead giveaways for a geostationary.  

For related info, here's an APOD of some geostationaries: http://apod.nasa.gov/apod/ap100220.html and it's associated video http://twanight.org/newTWAN/case.asp

At F2.8 I guess they're quite easy to catch!  

Mark

[RobertM]

Smells of 'lucky cam' to me

Nice fov with that scope and it's pulled in a lot of light for such short subs.  I guess you'll need sub-second exposures to stop the Trapezium burning out..

Robert

[Rick]

To be honest, if you're pointed at that bit of the sky then the chances of your missing one aren't high...

Well spotted, though.

[MarkS]

That's right Rick.  I'm going to have a look at other subs I've taken over the years - I bet they're full of them.  I generally use sigma stacking for the final stack and so that always removes them from the final image.

As long as the satellite is not in the Earth's shadow then it ought to appear.

[mickw]

Wouldn't be surprised if you captured the Iridium Cosmos crash 

[Fay]

Looks very good for 30 sec exposures, Mark!

[Rocket Pooch]

I like that esspecially with the diffraction spikes.

[Rick]

I like that esspecially with the diffraction spikes.

Perfectly respectable diffraction spikes, those; tell you something honest about the objects images and the instrument used to image them.

[Ian]

I like that esspecially with the diffraction spikes.

Perfectly respectable diffraction spikes, those; tell you something honest about the objects images and the instrument used to image them.

You sure? They look a little Carboni to me...

[MarkS]

You sure? They look a little Carboni to me...

The latest Carboni spikes are very realistic.  It's increasingly difficult to distinguish them from the real thing.

[Rick]

You sure? They look a little Carboni to me...

I trust Mark not to put Carboni excressences on his images.

The latest Carboni spikes are very realistic.  It's increasingly difficult to distinguish them from the real thing.

...thus making it more and more difficult to trust images on which his software might have been used. Doesn't make the forgery any less dishonest...